|
Post by weir on Dec 1, 2005 11:19:51 GMT -6
::)crzhrs... Indians never called Custer "Squaw Killer" but something like "quiet panthera" (sorry, I translate from my french rememberances, if someone can correct me), the one who attacks at dawn.
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Dec 1, 2005 11:25:20 GMT -6
Recently I was reading "The Journey of Crazy Horse A Lakota History" by Joseph Marshall. He says the name "Son of the Morning Star" was not meant to be positive. It is a reference to the fact that Custer attacked Black Kettle's village at dawn at the Washita. Greenpheon Absolutely, GP-- The second half of the name is consistently omitted by authors and Custerphiles: "Who Attacks At Dawn ..." Regards, Leyton McLean
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Dec 1, 2005 11:35:01 GMT -6
<Indians never called Custer "Squaw Killer">
You are talking in "general" terms. The CHEYENNE did call Custer "Squaw Killer"
See CAVALIER IN BUCKSKIN and THE CUSTER MYTH
|
|
|
Post by greenpheon on Dec 1, 2005 14:52:11 GMT -6
Well, evidently the Sioux picked up the SOTMS although in most of the narrative I have read attributed them with calling him Long Hair.
I do agree the Cheyenee had committed depredations in Kansas prior to Custer's attack. But I also bring your attention to the depredations of the Colorado militia under Major Chivington on Black Kettle's village at Sand Creek. Now, that was a horrible thing that was done to the Cheyenne and uncalled for. BK was displaying old glory as well as a flag of truce. To my mind Chivington was a criminal, despite his good work at Glorietta Pass against Confederate soldiers.
Greenpheon
|
|
|
Post by greenpheon on Dec 1, 2005 14:55:14 GMT -6
So, the entire name is "Son of the Morning Star Who Attacks At Dawn". I like it!
Greenpheon
|
|
|
Post by El Crab on Dec 2, 2005 1:02:18 GMT -6
Son of the Morning Star Creeping Panther Who Attacks at Dawn Hietzi Long Hair Curly Iron Butt Ringlets
Take your pick.
If I am not mistaken, Michno wrote of many myths about Sand Creek. I thought one of them was about the flags. Anyone who has read his Sand Creek book care to elaborate?
|
|
|
Post by weir on Dec 2, 2005 6:41:34 GMT -6
Attacking a village would not be considered as negative by Indians who always did that. Washita was not a massacre.
I don't think that Crows wept about Custer's attack in Washita. Crows hated Cheyennes as much as they hated Sioux. Custer's nickname "son of the morning star who attacks at dawn" (Crows) or "creeping panther who attacks at dawn" (Cheyennes) has not to be seen negative to anyone who studied what the Indians thought about war. See what Kate BigHead who was in Washita said about Custer.
Lefties, ignorants, dreamers or other champions of misinformation would not need to invent the "squaw killer" story if history was on their side. And I have to say that history is not often on their side.
So no problems for Custerphiles to quote the whole nickname, on the contrary of what M. MacLean say.
You know, the big problem when you studied the Indian Wars is that reality never have a match with the "Dances with Wolves" poetry and even if you look at Sand Creek some facts rise like : 200 white men, women and children were murdered by Black Kettle's Cheyennes before Chivington's massacre. And two children kidnapped near Fort Phil Kearny were held by the same not peaceful at all chief Black Kettle. I won't weep for this outlaw.
|
|
|
Post by Scout on Dec 2, 2005 7:45:45 GMT -6
Good points West....wasn't it the Crows who killed some of the Sioux prisoners, which really pissed off GAC. There was no love there at all between Crows and Sioux/ Cheyennes. It was certain death to fall into each others hands. The modern/revisionist slant is that there was some type of admiration society between the two. Pure fiction.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Dec 2, 2005 8:39:09 GMT -6
<The modern/revisionist slant is that there was some type of admiration society between the two. Pure fiction>
No one on this board believes that.
It was Crow scouts that killed Sioux peace emissaries which p-oed Miles.
And West: You keep repeating the same old stuff . . . over and over and over and over . . .
|
|
|
Post by markland on Dec 2, 2005 9:03:48 GMT -6
"And two children kidnapped near Fort Phil Kearny were held by the same not peaceful at all chief Black Kettle. I won't weep for this outlaw."
West, you are incorrect with the Ft. Phil Kearny reference. The closest white habitation to Ft. Phil Kearny, other than Ft. Reno and Platte River Crossing (Ft. Caspar) was well to the south of FPK. The ranches were in the vicinity of Ft. Laramie along the Platte Road. The four captives that Wynkoop went to repatriate which led to Black Kettle going to Denver were taken from the Great Platte Road and the Little Blue River area.
Billy
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Dec 2, 2005 9:47:38 GMT -6
Attacking a village would not be considered as negative by Indians who always did that. Washita was not a massacre. I don't think that Crows wept about Custer's attack in Washita. Crows hated Cheyennes as much as they hated Sioux. Custer's nickname "son of the morning star who attacks at dawn" (Crows) or "creeping panther who attacks at dawn" (Cheyennes) has not to be seen negative to anyone who studied what the Indians thought about war. See what Kate BigHead who was in Washita said about Custer. Lefties, ignorants, dreamers or other champions of misinformation would not need to invent the "squaw killer" story if history was on their side. And I have to say that history is not often on their side. So no problems for Custerphiles to quote the whole nickname, on the contrary of what M. MacLean say. You know, the big problem when you studied the Indian Wars is that reality never have a match with the "Dances with Wolves" poetry and even if you look at Sand Creek some facts rise like : 200 white men, women and children were murdered by Black Kettle's Cheyennes before Chivington's massacre. And two children kidnapped near Fort Phil Kearny were held by the same not peaceful at all chief Black Kettle. I won't weep for this outlaw. West-- Not to necessarily open a can of worms here (although I am ...), but you're always stating that because Black Kettle harboured warring braves in the village at the Washita, he was as guilty as if he himself committed the various and sundry crimes the kids engaged in. No, you don't need to revisit the multiple sins of the Indians ... But at the same time, Custer gets a free ride when it comes to the deaths of the women and children at Washita, because, "he wasn't for it" and "it was all the Osage scouts' fault", because there was a state of intense hatred between the Osage and Cherokee. But at the same time, weren't these scouts being paid by the United States' Army? Wasn't Custer their ultimate commander at Washita? Doesn't this make him as guilty as it does the scouts? Where does the buck stop when it comes to Custer? Why is there such a discernable double standard between GAC's behaviour and Black Kettle's scenario? Regards, Leyton McLean
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Dec 2, 2005 10:15:14 GMT -6
West:
Gall's wife and several children were killed by some of Reno's men during his attack on the village at the LBH. Since Custer ordered Reno to attack shouldn't he, as the ultimate commander, be responsible for the deaths of innocent women and children?
|
|
|
Post by custerstillstands on Dec 2, 2005 15:43:07 GMT -6
Reno was responsible of his column, but he never gave any order to his red barbarians to kill Gall's family. They did by themselves, only because Native American think it's fun to kill women and children (it's honorable). It's almost if Chivington was learning at a Native American school before Sand Creek, because he did exactly what Black Kettle and his fellows were doing in Colorado, and later in Kansas, for fun.
Native American war traditions were, and still are, the most barbarians we saw in the Plains. Most of the Native American warriors were barbarians and they loved to kill women and children and cut them in pieces. When they had to fight real soldiers, they tortured and cut them in pieces too.
An objective account of the war in the Plains, without any lefty idea, would conclude that Native Americans don't deserve any monument or recognition. They were as barbarians as Attila in Eastern Europe or Gengis Khan in Asia (Khan already had the tradition of cutting his ennemies in pieces, even the families, and taking their hair for fun).
Americans should be thankful that some frontiermen defeated the barbarians.
However, the fashion today is to excuse Indians horrors (far more pften than the Whites, and the chiefs who commited them slept well until their quietly death in the reservations) and forget what Native American customs were.
But let be honest for once. Nobody who really know Native American customs will regret that the tribes have been defeated. Custer said once that it was "a good job to do". That's right. It's not PC to say that, but it's true.
Fenimore Cooper and Alexander Pope wouldn't agree, but they didn't see the Indians that Willie Blinn saw.
|
|
|
Post by custerstillstands on Dec 2, 2005 16:34:12 GMT -6
For people who think that I am going too far with the Native Americans, you should remember the peaceful Black Kettle's job in 1868 :
"On the 10th of August, 1868, the Cheyennes struck the settlements on the Saline River. On the 12th they reached the Solomon and wiped out a settlement where the city of Minneapolis is now situated. In this raid fifteen persons were killed, two wounded, and five women carried off. On the same day they attacked Wright’s bay camp near Ft. Dodge, raided the Pawnee, and killed two settlers on the Republican. On the 8th of September they captured a train at the Cimarron crossing of the Arkansas River, securing possession of seventeen men, whom burned; and the day following they murdered six men between Sheridan and Ft. Wallace. On the first of September, 1868, the Indians killed four men at Spanish Fork, in Texas, and outraged three women. One of those women was outraged by thirteen Indians and afterward killed and scalped. They left her with the hatchet still sticking in her head. Before leaving, they murdered her four little children. Of the children carried off by the Indians from Texas in 1868, fourteen were frozen to death in captivity.
The total of losses from September 12, 1868, to Febuary 9, 1869, exclusive of casualties incident to military operations, was 158 men murdered, sixteen wounded and forty-one scalped. Three scouts were killed, fourteen women outraged, one man was captured, four women and twenty-four children were carried off. Nearly all of these losses occurred in what we then called western Kansas, although the Saline, Solomon and Republican do not seem so very far west now. "
And we have a Black Kettle museum today... It's like a Chivington museum on the Sand Creek site...
|
|
|
Post by bigpond on Dec 2, 2005 17:45:10 GMT -6
Waffle,Waffle,Waffle,blah,blah,blah,the needles stuck again,I am no leftie as you put it but I am getting a bit pi**ed off reading the same old rubbish from the same old Indian haters !!! Mostly crap from Continental Europe as well from people who's country couldn't fight there way out of a wet paper bag !! What is it with you guys,torture,atrocities whatever you want to call it has been with us since day dot and still continues to this day.Lets not forget since Columbus stumbled upon that small island Millions,I repeat Millions of native peoples succumbed to every conceivable death known,so lets move on and stick to the threads.
|
|